After coming out on the losing end of a U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, Texas Republican leaders are now looking to the Texas Supreme Court to narrow the scope of that landmark ruling.

Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Thursday filed an amicus brief with the Texas Supreme Court urging the all-Republican court to reconsider a Houston case challenging the city’s benefits policy for married same-sex couples. It appears they’ve set their eyes on the Houston case as a way to limit the effect of the high court’s ruling.

Okay, so here’s the deal. Lawyers for the State of Texas are throwing paper at the lawyers for the City of Houston over whether or not gay people who are married are really, you know, married. And who is paying for all those damn lawyers? Not the Republican Party, that’s for sure.

Houstonians are being asked to foot the bill for both sets of lawyers to fight each other, at the state and local level. Ain’t that just like Republicans — they never met a battle they are unwilling to fight with your money. It’s like cock-fighting with lawyers.

This is the damn Lawyer Full Employment Act.

Plus, it’s just wrong. These guys are waaaaay too concerned about what gay people are doing.

It’s over. The Supreme Court has ruled. Spend my tax dollars on something that will improve my life, not the Texas Bar Association.

Um. . .a ruling by the United States Supreme Court override rulings by the Texas Supreme Court, every time. Marriage is marriage, whatever the sex of the partners. The Fat Lady has sung on this issue, and Abbott, et al. are wasting Texas taxpayers’ money playing to their voting base.

What happened to their whole beef about local government rights. They were all about FEDERAL government telling them what to do. Well hells bells I’m a Houstonian, I pay local taxes and I don’t want them filing an Amicus brief on my behalf!

Wait… this is to “reconsider a case”? Does that mean the TX Supreme has already considered the case in favor of Houston and these asshats are asking them to, wut, change their mind?

Do they NOT know how the law works? The ONLY way a court will “reconsider” is if you present compelling NEW arguments or evidence. Just because you find a new bunch of idiots who say “we don’t like that” is NOT new or compelling.

The asshats keep using the term “same-sex” marriage as if there is a separate class of marriage in the US. There isn’t. There’s just marriage. The participants’ gender doesn’t matter any more. When you extend benefits to marrieds, all marrieds get it.

Their attempt at trying to declare same-sex unions as “different” has no basis in current law. So suck losers! AND STOP WASTING TAX DOLLARS YOU CITIZENS OF THE LONE BRAIN CELL STATE!

“Those q****s aren’t people and we’re gonna use a lot of taxpayer money to say so.”

I wish I could say that I’m surprised or that this will hurt them in the next election. I’m not and it won’t. I probably won’t even live to see all these old bigots die off, though I hope they’re soon reduced to mumbling in their pureed peas at the home.

I’d say this is an obvious abuse of their power to file a case with no chance of winning for purely political purposes. The ethical breaches aside, possibly a violation of the Hatch Act?

On the other hand, if Trump wins, his nominees to the Supremes will make Clarence Thomas and Alito the Court’s new left wing. If Hillary wins, and can get some of her preferred nominees on the Court, I expect these types of suits to go away for a number of years.

Respect for the law of the land or what? Any court with half a brain sitting on the bench needs to toss these ‘cases’ on the grounds that the complainants have no grounds, standing or ground to stand on. Wot? It’s like this, unless these voyeurs can demonstrate that marriage equality adversely effects them in some manner, they need to be sent packing like the pack mules they are with the court costs attached to their personal bank accounts.

For anyone seeking a better argument, I would direct you to the words of Ted Olsen, another straight white male who gets this never should have been an issue under the provisions of the 14th Amendment.

Does it ever, ever, ever occur to WingNuts that people who aren’t married are perfectly capable of having sex. Therefore not allowing couples to get married does not prevent them from being naughty with each other.

It is weird that WingNuts are so preoccupied with sex–especially other people’s. (That’s called voyeurism, guys.)

It is even weirder that they come up with anti-gay and anti-women laws that they somehow thing will control other people’s sex lives.

LynnN, the RWNJs used to be horrified because the gays were “promiscuous.” Then a lot of gays announced that they wanted to get married, and somehow that was even more horrifying. As my Dad used to say (usually to other drivers), “Make up your feeble mind!”

To Follow Juanita On Facebook:

About

Welcome to The World's Most Dangerous Beauty Salon, Inc.

My name is Susan DuQuesnay Bankston. I live in Richmond, Texas, in the heart of Tom DeLay's old district. It's nuttier than squirrel poop here.

I am honored and privileged to know Miss Juanita Jean Herownself, hairdresser extraordinary and political maven. Since she does not have time to fiddle with this internet stuff, I type her website for her and you can read it if you want to. If you don't, she truly does not give a big bear's butt.

A lot of what I post here has to do with local politics, but you probably have the same folks in your local government.

This ain't a blog. Blogs are way too trendy for me. This is a professional political organization.